By Jennifer Vogt-Erickson

Jennifer Vogt-Erickson is a member of the Freeborn County DFL Party.

It seems that Trump’s presidential hopes are sinking more each day, maybe more each time he opens his mouth. I’m heartened by the trickle of Republican leaders saying they won’t vote for him. It takes courage to break ranks, especially for the first ones who do it.

In spite of whatever it was that allowed Trump to rise to the top during the primaries, it’s vital to withdraw support from a candidate who commands so little self-discipline under pressure and who is making a series of increasingly erratic statements. Is he being sarcastic, or is he being serious? Who can tell? Can he tell?

Even if some of the biggest names like Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell don’t bow out of their Trump endorsements, there are already leaders who want to pull the party’s financial plug on Trump. Last week about 75 Republican officials circulated a letter to Reince Priebus, the head of the Republican National Committee, urging him not to spend any more funds on Trump’s campaign but to use RNC money on GOP House and Senate races.

Hillary Clinton is not waiting around for Trump to get his act together, and she’s outspending him by large amounts. She has already purchased over $50 million in television ads compared to Trump’s $0. In the key swing states of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida, Clinton has set up extensive field operations with over three dozen offices and hundreds of paid staffers. In stark contrast, so far Trump has set up a total of seven lightly-staffed offices in those states.

He seems to think that late-night tweeting can replace a ground game.

Trump also used to rely on free publicity from the media to get his name and message on TV — an estimated $2 billion worth of gratuitous coverage during the primaries, dwarfing all other candidates — but lately he seems to be treating the media as his main opponent rather than Clinton. The real estate mogul’s relationship with the media has soured.

If Trump thinks back for a moment, it might have something to do with the things he has said. He only has to recall the last couple weeks: the Khans, ISIS, nuclear weapons, Russian hackers, Second Amendment people, etc. Self-reflection, though, does not seem to be part of his repertoire. It’s not him, it’s them. He’d rather grasp for the next conspiracy theory than face reality.

Throughout Trump’s lurching and listing, Clinton has gone about her business in no-drama fashion. Aside from social issues, which Trump is squishy on anyway, she may look comparatively safer to many Republicans who base their votes on national security and economic stability. Hillary has hawkish tendencies and Wall Street’s approval. She’s as deliberative as Trump is volatile.

If abortion and other social issues hadn’t become so partisan (back in the 1970s, Republicans and Democrats were both split within their parties on abortion rights), Hillary might even seem centrist, not just to progressives like me, but to conservatives as well.

Obviously Hillary Clinton isn’t my first choice. My heart is still with Bernie Sanders even though I won’t get to check a box for him in November. I’m more concerned about the myriad women struggling at the bottom than the women breaking glass ceilings at the top, though certainly I cheer them on too. While it’s great when people earn more by achieving more, anybody should be able to earn a living wage for honest work, whatever that work may be.

I’m still waiting for a progressive champion to make it to the finals again. In the meantime, Democrats have a solid, predictable candidate who takes responsibility for her words and the impact they make. Steady as she goes.