It’s Hillary Clinton’s time to finally feel the Bern.
The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee at long last on Tuesday was endorsed by her presidential rival in the party, Sen. Bernie Sanders, during their first joint rally at Portsmouth, N.H. Sanders’ bow to Clinton had to happen ahead of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia on July 25-28.
Sanders was exceptional at winning the attention, votes and funding from young adults. The democratic socialist’s backers are as desperate for change as the people backing presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.
They just are differently motivated. The key now for Clinton is to focus on winning Sanders’ supporters.
Never miss a local story.
There is no guarantee that she has their vote just because Sanders now is backing the former secretary of state, U.S. senator from New York and first lady. Clinton is well-qualified for the Oval Office.
However, she definitely needs a political hearing aid because she has been largely deaf to the outcry from Sanders’ followers who want universal health care, free college tuition, an abundance of job opportunities, a living wage instead of a raise in the minimum wage and an impenetrable fortress of federal programs that will protect the now-embattled middle class from falling into poverty.
The likelihood that any of that will happen under a Clinton presidency is slim. She is expected to continue the practices and policies of the Obama administration, which also isn’t enough to ensure that she will get African Americans and Latinos of all ages to go to the polls in large numbers to vote for her as they did for President Barack Obama. Clinton must campaign harder to win those voting blocs, too.
But even Sanders’ campaign platforms would be laughable if Trump were to win the White House. The GOP convention runs July 18-21 in Cleveland, and Trump is expected to announce his running mate this week.
That person will have to have a calming, sensible, moderating influence on the loud, unpredictable and offensive candidacy of Donald Trump. He has offended minorities, immigrants, women, people with disabilities, Muslims, U.S. allies, his fellow Republicans and the judiciary, and still his run for the presidency appears unstoppable.
But he has gotten the attention of one liberal member of the U.S. Supreme Court, and her precedent-setting comments have not been complimentary. But what about this election year hasn’t been bizarre?
Make no mistake about it, Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was right to give her opinion on what a Donald Trump presidency would do to the United States.
The 83-year-old was appointed in 1993 by newly minted President Bill Clinton, and after being confirmed by the Senate took the oath of office on Aug. 10, 1993.
Ginsburg has been condemned by Republicans and Democrats for her statements about Trump because she surrenders her objectivity and impartiality, which judges everywhere must strive to maintain. But she hit the nail on the head, saying in an interview with CNN legal analyst Joan Biskupic:
“He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego.”
To The New York Times, she said: “I can't imagine what this place would be — I can't imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president. For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be — I don't even want to contemplate that.”
Her late husband, Marty, Ginsburg recalled, used to say when politics swung the wrong way: “Now it's time for us to move to New Zealand.”
A lot of Americans feel the same way only to them Canada or Mexico are looking better and better.
And if Trump were to win, Ginsburg replied: “I don't want to think about that possibility, but if it should be, then everything is up for grabs.”
Democrats can only hope that if voters do elect Trump over Clinton that they will wisely vote out Republicans in the House and Senate, giving Democrats control of Congress so that a constitutional check on Trump’s power grab will be firmly in place.