Matt Fleming: Rob Bonta should brush up on the facts before begging for attention

Here’s some free advice for politicians: Be sure to get the basics right when begging for attention on social media.

Over the weekend, California’s Yale-educated Attorney General Rob Bonta, who is considering a run for governor, posted on X something that was designed to look tough toward incoming-President Donald Trump, but unfortunately just showed a cluelessness about things a person in his position should know, like elections, the Constitution and grammar.

“President-elect Trump lost the popular vote (got <50%), has no mandate (narrow <1.5% margin of victory), & the US Senate should fulfill its constitutional duty to provide “advice & consent” to presidential cabinet nominees, including rejecting those unfit/unqualified for the job,” Bonta posted.

Each time I read that post it hurts a little more. First, Trump didn’t lose the popular vote. The presidential candidate with the most votes wins the popular vote and Trump got approximately 78 million votes to Vice President Kamala Harris’s approximately 74 million. Or to put it in terms Bonta might understand: (78M > 74M).

I assume that Bonta meant Trump didn’t win a majority of the popular vote, which is true. But that’s not what he posted; it’s also irrelevant.

Presidential contests aren’t decided by the national popular vote, which means the claim that Trump only had a “<1.5% margin of victory” is wrong. In the Electoral College, which is what decides presidential contests (except in a tie), Trump’s margin of victory greatly exceeded 1.5%, winning 312 to 226.

Maybe Bonta was talking about Trump’s margin of victory in the popular vote, which, again, is irrelevant. It also would indicate that Trump won the popular vote, which betrays Bonta’s first point about not winning the popular vote.

Does Trump have a mandate? This point is at least debatable since there’s no  threshold for mandates, but Trump’s victory was decisive and Republicans won the Senate and retained the House. Seems like voters were clear.

Bonta’s point calling on the Senate to vet nominees through its “advice and consent” powers is a waste of time since the Senate has always done that, and will continue to. The Senate has already started and Trump has not even been sworn in yet.

Presidents always have picks with varying qualifications and levels of support. As I wrote in a column a few weeks ago, Trump so far is no exception.

Trump has plenty of great picks, including: Florida Sen. Marco Rubio for secretary of state, New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik for United Nations ambassador and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum for Interior secretary.

Others have been bizarre. Then-Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz was a truly terrible choice for attorney general in every way possible. He was grossly unqualified for the job and had a lingering House ethics investigation over allegations of sexual misconduct, among other things.

After a few meetings with senators on Capitol Hill, Gaetz withdrew his name from consideration. Why? Because Gaetz quickly learned he did not have enough support, senators were exercising their power of advice and consent.

There is no question Bonta will loathe some of Trump’s picks, as is the case with every administration and members of the opposite party. But that doesn’t mean the Senate won’t be doing its job.

Bonta could have just as easily posted something factual and interesting, but what he posted was beneath the dignity of his office and diminished his standing as a serious person.

The fact that the post remains up shows little regard for excellence. Bonta should tighten up if he wants to pursue higher office.

Matt Fleming is a columnist for the Southern California News Group.