In this distasteful election cycle, there is only one reasonable choice for stable leadership at a time when Americans yearn to move past gridlock and tackle long-standing problems with pragmatic solutions. Hillary Clinton is the Star Tribune Editorial Board's choice to become the next president of the United States.
As with every leader, Clinton is not without her failings. She relies too heavily on a small coterie of longtime loyalists. She allowed a brutal primary to push her toward positions on trade and other issues that will need readjusting. Her tendency toward obfuscation and evading the truth when cornered — as seen in her handling of State Department e-mails and alleged Clinton Foundation conflicts — is a trait that must be overcome with a new commitment to candor and transparency.
But when those weaknesses are considered against the towering flaws of her opponent, Donald J. Trump, Clinton clearly is the nation's best hope.
Her commitment to public service is bedrock-deep and has been evident throughout her life. As a student president at Wellesley College, Clinton pushed the administration to increase black enrollment. Fresh out of law school, she investigated discrimination at private schools in the South for the Children's Defense Fund. As first lady of Arkansas, she used her office to fight for literacy, improved education standards and children's welfare.
With a formidable intellect, Clinton has a command of policy that is legendary, stemming from a lifetime of attention to detail and from the studious nature so necessary to grasping the complexities a president faces. She has always pushed boundaries, which has made her a lightning rod for those uncomfortable with a woman's ambition. As the nation's first lady, she rewrote the book on that office, using its power to champion the cause of women's rights across the globe and leading President Bill Clinton's effort for affordable, accessible health care that critics back then labeled "Hillarycare."
Opponents were savage, and the plan failed, triggering a furious backlash against her that, in a real sense, has never abated. But the nation also saw something about the grit and persistence of a woman who refused to give up. Denied the whole loaf, she instead reached out to those who had lambasted her and worked toward a compromise that resulted in the Children's Health Insurance Program, which came to cover 8 million children. Some have attempted to downplay her role in its development, but Sen. Ted Kennedy, the architect of that plan, later noted that the program "wouldn't be in existence today if we didn't have Hillary pushing for it from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue."
Nearly a quarter-century later, Clinton knows she will again have to reach out to opponents for a reasonable compromise that will address the problems in the Affordable Care Act while preserving the gains that have benefited so many. Cautious and pragmatic, she is willing to play the long game, and can be expected to bring that same determination to mental health care, poverty and other long-standing problems.
Americans are understandably frustrated by years of gridlock and endless partisan posturing, of brinkmanship and manufactured, either-or choices. They know, deep down, that's not how problems get solved. Unlike her rival, Clinton has shown time and again her willingness to work with opponents to close divides, forge relationships, listen as well as talk, and develop a middle ground that gives a little to both sides. If this nation's democracy is to function and progress, it must restore value to the idea of compromise.
