Letter from the Editor: Bush vs Clinton: not a sequel that America needs
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.So it will be Bush vs Clinton all over again after all. Not that anyone had much doubt, but this week American media reported Jeb Bush had resigned all his private sector board positions in anticipation of a bid for the White House.
Just before Christmas, he confirmed on Facebook that he was “actively exploring” a run. As for Hillary Clinton, everything she’s done for the past two years points to her candidacy.
For all that, there are good reasons for supposing that this battle between modern America’s two foremost political dynasties won’t just be a re-run.
When Bill Clinton was inaugurated, he was a young man (46) elected on the promise of a better tomorrow. If Hillary makes it to the White House, she will be a relative veteran (69) elected largely on memories of yesteryear. Americans are nostalgic for the Clinton brand: Bill’s the most popular living politician there. Yet for all his exceptional qualities as a leader, he had one more than any other: luck with timing.
His two terms coincided with a period of relative global stability. The Soviet Union had collapsed. The world economy was humming along. Islamic terrorism was largely hidden from view. Washington was working pretty well.
Some guys have all the luck. Hillary has none of these advantages. Now Russia is resurgent. China is soaring. Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (which she wrongly backed) have cost endless blood. America has been through the biggest financial crisis since the Depression. Ravaged by globalisation and automation, its middle class is hollowing out. Today, Washington is dysfunctional. Government recently shut down altogether.
These changed circumstances apply to Jeb too. He’s more sensible than most Republicans on issues such as climate change and immigration. But he certainly isn’t just a re-run of his father or brother. George H W was conditioned by the Cold War. George W authored the “war on terror”. Jeb has no interest in these.
For these reasons and more, the coming avalanche of commentary on the Bush vs Clinton battle is likely to be a little myopic. And it’s precisely because of the huge challenges America faces that it’s vital there’s a proper selection battle. I hope, for instance, that Rand Paul and Chris Christie run for the GOP. Paul’s ultra-libertarian politics might be mostly potty, but he has some smart ideas on poverty. Christie reminds America what moderate, competent conservatism looks like. For the Democrats, Elizabeth Warren could yet win. Her analysis of how the country was hijacked by Wall Street is often right.
Whoever wins, they need a mandate for negotiating tomorrow’s world, rather than reviving yesterday’s.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments