Despite Hillary Clinton having lost the 2016 presidential election to Donald Trump, one liberal writer wants the former secretary of state to run against Trump again in 2020.
In an op-ed published Friday on Salon.com, Matthew Rozsa took issue with a recent tweet from Trump saying that Clinton was good for the Republican Party and encouraging her to “give it another try in three years!”
Advertisement - story continues below
“Are you sick of Republicans? Or just right-wingers in general? Do you want to send a message to Washington that you aren’t going to buy into their racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic and classist nonsense for one second longer?” Rozsa wrote.
“Then do the very thing that Donald Trump unintentionally encouraged in a recent tweet: Encourage Hillary Clinton to run for president in 2020!”
Rozsa laid out four reasons why he believes Clinton would be a better president than Trump.
First, he argued that Clinton is comparable to former U.K. Prime Minister Winston Churchill, whereas Russian President Vladimir Putin is similar to German dictator Adolf Hitler.
His premise was that Clinton serves as a beacon of hope for the world in troubled times.
“A foreign despot who has invaded neighboring countries and has a right-wing nationalist agenda is about as Nazi-like as you can get,” he wrote.
“This is where Clinton offers a quality that no politician in America can beat. While Republicans are trying to tar her with a bogus scandal connecting her to Russia (and anyone who believes Clinton did something wrong in the Uranium One deal lacks credibility on all matters political), the reality is that no candidate can be better described as Russia’s nemesis than Clinton,” he added.
His second point was that Clinton being elected as the next president would anger “misogynistic trolls” and promote women’s issues across America.
“I can’t think of a single political figure in recent American history who has been hated as deeply, or for as long, as Hillary Clinton,” Rozsa said.
“From the moment she emerged on the national stage in 1992 as a distinctly feminist prospective first lady, she has been the target of right-wing wrath woefully out of proportion to anything she has ever said or done.”
Third, he argued that because Clinton won the popular vote in the 2016 election, she has “earned the right” to be the Democrat nominee in 2020.
Clinton did win the popular vote, receiving 65,853,516 votes compared to Trump’s 62,984,825, but Rozsa’s piece failed to mention that Trump handily won the Electoral College.
Trump won 30 states whereas Clinton only won 20, which resulted in Trump winning 304 electoral votes compared to Clinton’s 227.
Rozsa’s final point was that he believes Clinton would be “a good president.”
“Frankly, the worst thing that can be said about a potential 2020 Clinton candidacy, especially in America’s current cultural and political climate, is that her husband still hasn’t answered for the numerous sexual abuse accusations against him,” he wrote.
Arguing that Clinton has always recovered from a “low stock” and has “always recovered,” Rozsa concluded by encouraging Clinton to run for president a third time.
What do you think? Scroll down to comment below.