Will Hillary’s hopes stand real scrutiny? - Clinton candidacy confirmed

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON’S ambition has never been in question or hidden. 

Long before her husband Bill became American president in January 1993 — yes, more than a quarter of a century ago — her singular, upwards-only determination was obvious. The only real question was how far would that intuitive and emotional force take her?

Yesterday, by confirming her long-anticipated second White House bid, we came a step closer to answering that question. Should she not win the Democratic nomination — unlikely if not unimaginable — or should she win it and be defeated by another candidate, it is hard to imagine that her career will have anything more to offer in late 2016 than an epilogue. Those who imagined that point had been reached when Barack Obama unexpectedly defeated her and secured the Democratic nomination in 2008 underestimated her grit or William Congreve’s truth: “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.”

She was, and is, driven by an almost feral force that her supporters admire, believing it the energy of the righteous and honourable. Her detractors, and there are many even in the Democratic Party, wonder if that ambition is balanced by circumspection, self-doubt or even a reliable integrity.

She has been on the world stage for so very long — the late Albert Reynolds was taoiseach when she became first lady; Niamh Kavanagh won the Eurovision that year too — that there are myriad examples to support those conflicting contentions. That longevity has entrenched opinion and it is hard to see her winning too many new supporters, so everything may turn on who opposes her and how her loyalists perform in the next 20 months. Ironically, in her last run, she shied away from playing the gender card, but now, just eight years later, an ever-changing world may have made it redundant. Gender issues may not, thankfully, provoke the blind loyalty they did in another time.

There are obvious questions though. Since 1989 only Barack Obama has intruded in the Bush and Clinton turn-and-about-turn dynasties and this hardly seems to honour the spirit of democracy. That question is sharpened by the prospect of Jeb Bush, a son and brother of former presidents being the Republican nominee. This seems a very narrow field of representatives from a population of 320 million.

Clinton has promised to align herself with the interests of working people and families struggling in the cold reality of a globalised world but it is difficult to imagine that someone as openly voracious — she reputedly charged Goldman Sachs $200,000-plus for one speaking engagement and complained of being “almost broke” when she left the White House — could have any real empathy with that constituency.

Assuming she is nominated, she will run at the end of Obama’s eight years in office and probably have to carry the burden of disappointment provoked by his failure to deliver on his glittering promise. Her own record — and principles — will face a degree of scrutiny she can hardly welcome.

Republican powerbrokers will not be surprised by the announcement. Neither will they be daunted.