Detroit Free Press Editorial Board

"Living History" — the title of Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2003 memoir — was accurate even then.

Clinton had spent the bulk of the 1990s as America's first lady — the first to insist on her own professional life, the distinct identity for which she'd fought, to stand apart from her husband's presidency. She'd played a significant role in that presidency, as her husband presided over a decade of unprecedented prosperity. She'd endured accusations of corruption and scandal. And she'd won a seat in the U.S. Senate — the first woman elected to that august body from the State of New York.

Tuesday night, she burnished that list of accomplishments with another historic first: After a long primary battle, Clinton became the Democratic Party's presumptive presidential nominee, the first female candidate of either major party to secure that status.

It's a moment that resonates with American women and others who have fought for gender equality. And — like the nomination and subsequent election of President Barack Obama, the U.S. first African-American president — Clinton's victories promise that there is more to come. Each of them trod uncharted ground, cutting a path for those who will come after.

It is an achievement that Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who mounted an unexpectedly serious challenge to Clinton, cannot seem to accept. Tuesday night — as primaries in California and New Jersey made it abundantly clear that he has no path forward — Sanders vowed to fight on, insisting that a winner can't be determined until the Democratic National Convention makes the nomination official in July.

Losing ugly: Bernie Sanders' Neanderthal moment

But the reality of math — Clinton has beaten Sanders in the popular vote, pledged delegates and super delegates — means that her nomination is certain. Sanders' argument that he should be anointed, despite his losses, is nonsensical.

It can be difficult to understand and accept when a fight is over. But this fight is over. It is time for Democrats to come together.

For Clinton, that means doing more to explain how she'll address income inequality — Sanders' signature issue — and civil rights. It means she must expound on her sensible solutions to expand access to health care granted in the Affordable Care Act, and to provide support for college students and reduction of debt. It means continuing to weather the controversy over her use of a private e-mail server, a display of poor judgment and the subject of a federal investigation. And continuing to mount a high-dollar, astronomically expensive campaign, while deflecting criticisms that she's too close to big donors.

For Sanders, that means accepting the reality of the popular vote and delegate tallies, and using his substantial platform to urge change within the party, and to support downticket candidates for the U.S. Congress and state and local government.

Some Sanders supporters seem disinclined to accept Clinton's wins as legitimate, arguing process — never mind that the processes Sanders' supporters object to were in place long before his candidacy. And so we ask: If the system can produce no outcome you can accept as legitimate other than the one that favors your candidate, is the problem actually with the system?

There is an opportunity, here, for real change. For progress. For reinvigorating the American left. For creating a bulwark against the chaos a Donald Trump presidency, the presumptive Republican nominee, promises to usher in.

For living history.