Our View

Press-Citizen editorial board

Hillary Clinton deserves a medal.

Sharing a debate stage with Donald Trump for six hours, weathering the slings and arrows of public opinion and nationally campaigning for almost two years is not a fate we'd wish on anyone. This election cycle has seemed interminable from the outset, and the outcome a long-ago foregone conclusion. But the one saving grace of this endless race for the White House is that, in all likelihood, it will end with a tough, qualified woman serving as president of the United States: Clinton, who we endorse wholeheartedly.

Trump removed himself from consideration for our endorsement early in the primary campaign, when he called for a ban on Muslim immigration and the deportation of 11 million undocumented workers from the United States. Since then, he has only dug a deeper hole, making more and more outlandish, dangerous statements, culminating with the release of audio on which he bragged about forcing himself on women, tantamount to confessing to sexual assault. The negatives of a Trump presidency have been well-documented, and to go into them here would necessitate more print space than we are allowed. Suffice it to say, the United States would suffer greatly from Donald Trump's residency in the White House, not least of which would see the lowering of our already tarnished reputation worldwide.

Clinton is our candidate of choice by default, being the major-party candidate who isn't Donald Trump, but that doesn't mean we endorse her on that basis alone. As we said in our primary endorsement, Clinton's qualifications are immense. As a former first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of state, Clinton carries the experience that will allow her to do the job on day one. Trump has no foreign relations or political experience, and his first 100 days would likely be spent mending fences laid to waste by his volatile campaign.

Of the two candidates, Clinton seems the better equipped to turn her platform into reality — and her platform the better to improve the lives of ordinary Americans. A higher minimum wage, expanding access to health insurance, easing student debt and making college affordable: All these are planks of Clinton's agenda that have direct benefits for the vast majority of American people. Trump's tax plan, little more than Republican supply-side orthodoxy, would cut taxes for nearly all Americans but reserve the most drastic cuts for those at the top of the income ladder. We've seen the results of this type of plan, and they're not pretty.

Admittedly, there are some things about Clinton that make us uneasy. Her associations with Wall Street and with corporate outfits like Wal-Mart damage her credibility as a fighter on behalf of working Americans, and was a big source of distrust among supporters of her primary opponent, Bernie Sanders. But Sanders' embrace of Clinton, and her adoption of more liberal policy positions, repair much of that insecurity. Her record speaks for itself — from the creation of the children's health insurance program to votes to increase the minimum wage, she has shown her alliances lie with working people more often than not. She "plays the game" like everyone else does, including Trump, yet has received heavier criticism for it than most candidates in recent memory.

We do not back Clinton by virtue of her not being Trump, as others have done. We endorse her with the knowledge she will start work immediately, and do her best to restore a badly shaken confidence in American politics wrought by this election cycle. It's a monumental task, and we do not envy her for shouldering it. For all the vitriol that has characterized this long campaign season, it's nothing compared with the presidency.

But Hillary Clinton is up to the challenge.