Hillary set the bar very high in 2008 when she nominated Obama from the convention floor with a smile on her face.  I was very impressed as an Obama partisan.

"[I]t is not enough to be a candidate of anger. Anger is not a plan; it is not a reason to wield power; it is not a reason for hope. Anger is too narrow to motivate a majority of voters, and it does not make a case for the ability and experience to govern.

[...]

"It's easy to blame billionaires for everything, but quite another to know what to do about it. During his 25 years in Congress, [Sen. Bernie] Sanders has stuck to uncompromising ideals, but his outsider stance has not attracted supporters among the Democrats.

[...]

"Every time Sanders is challenged on how he plans to get his agenda through Congress and past the special interests, he responds that the 'political revolution' that sweeps him into office will somehow be the magical instrument of the monumental changes he describes. This is a vague, deeply disingenuous idea that ignores the reality of modern America. With the narrow power base and limited political alliances that Sanders had built in his years as the democratic socialist senator from Vermont, how does he possibly have a chance of fighting such entrenched power?

"I have been to the revolution before. It ain't happening.

"Hillary Clinton is one of the most qualified candidates for the presidency in modern times, as was Al Gore. We cannot forget what happened when Gore lost and George W. Bush was elected and became arguably one of the worst presidents in American history. The votes cast for the fantasy of Ralph Nader were enough to cost Gore the presidency. Imagine what a similar calculation would do to this country if a 'protest vote' were to put the presidency, Congress and the Supreme Court all in the hands of the extreme right wing that now controls the Republican Party.

"Clinton not only has the experience and achievements as first lady, senator and secretary of state, but a commitment to social justice and human rights that began for her as a young woman. She was one of those college students in the Sixties who threw herself into the passionate causes of those times, and she continues to do so today.

[...]

"You get a sense of 'authenticity' when you hear Sanders talking truth to power, but there is another kind of authenticity, which may not feel as good but is vitally important, when Clinton speaks honestly about what change really requires, about incremental progress, about building on what Obama has achieved in the arenas of health care, clean energy, the economy, the expansion of civil rights. There is an inauthenticity in appeals to anger rather than to reason, for simplified solutions rather than ones that stand a chance of working. This is true about Donald Trump, and lamentably also true about Bernie Sanders.

[...]

"Elections have consequences. Bush brought us into a war that still plagues us today; he authorized massive tax cuts for the rich and the corporations; abandoned the Middle East peace process; ushered in the worst financial crisis since the Depression; and totally neglected the climate emergency.

"This election is even more consequential, a tipping point like none since before the Civil War. We are at the culmination of a decades-long effort by the right wing to take over the government. ... The House, the Senate and, until a month ago, the Supreme Court are under the thumb of special interests and the extremely wealthy, who seek to roll back decades and decades of legislative progress that have furthered 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.' And most horrifying of all, they would stop the world's last-minute effort to fight climate change, where the stakes are the fate of civilization as we now know it.

"When I consider what's in their hearts, I think both Clinton and Sanders come out on the side of the angels; but when I compare their achievements in the past decades, the choice is clear. This is not the time in history for a 'protest vote.'"

(Emphasis is mine.)

I, too, will support our Democratic Party's nominee, whoever she or he may be, to the very utmost of my abilities. But given the present choice before us this primary season, I agree with Ms. Wenner and Rolling Stone:

"[Hillary] Clinton is far more likely to win the general election than Sanders. The voters who have rallied to Sanders during the primaries are not enough to generate a Democratic majority in November. Clinton will certainly bring them along, and add them to the broad coalition that Democrats have put together in the past to take the presidency, as did Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

"On the question of experience, the ability to enact progressive change, and the issue of who can win the general election and the presidency, the clear and urgent choice is Hillary Clinton."