It speaks volumes about the current state of the Republican Trump party when a Republican simply doing her job is heralded as a savior of Democracy.
That being said, I'm all for her pulverizing Trump into a bloody pulp. I just don't want to see her as the first female President because she is, after all, still a Republican.
[usual warning: this comes from a non-U.S. citizen]
I happened to read her Concession Speech this morning and , though I understand how it can appear to be straight minded to Americans of all political sides who rightfully believe their democracy should be at the center of national debate, still I agree that she's just and only doing the obvious amongst what's expected from anyone navigating local politics: doing anything in her power to defend and preserve the government of the people by the people and for the people, as she likes to remind her flock.
Now, I couldn't help but being annoyed by her references to the founding fathers. Lincoln, Ulysses Grant, la di dah…
As if she didn't know how much these "fathers" were way more progressive in their time than the Republican Party has over the last 50 years, including her own views.
To put it short: she might currently be in the spotlight with regards to her battle against Trump, and we certainly thank her for that. Yet her old-fashioned – populist even – way of addressing the people shows a lack of understanding what's at the heart of most Americans weariness and concerns. So she comes down to being a politician among others, quite simply.
And let us not forget who her father is and what HE did to make our lives better.