She persisted.

Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton apparently is running for president again. She's out to settle old scores with President Trump.

According to The Week:

Philippe Reines, who worked for Hillary Clinton going back to 2002 and was her senior adviser at the State Department, made the argument to Politico Friday that the former Democratic nominee might actually be the party's best hope for defeating Trump in 2020. He said no other Democrat has "anywhere near a base of 32 million people," especially not Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) or Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). The party, he feels, shouldn't dismiss her as a failed candidate because she's "smarter" and "tougher" than most, and she "could raise money easier than most."

But it doesn't sound like this is just wishful thinking on his part. He really thinks it could happen, saying the chances of Clinton running in 2020 are "not zero.”

Lucky us.

Like her 36-point approval rating, in the wake of her obvious campaign to spy on her rival, Donald Trump, and pin the whole thing on him as Russian collusion, has helped her in the public's estimation. Or as if her unresolved use of an unauthorized private server in some guy's bathtub, is great for her poll ratings. Or her Clinton Foundation pay-to-play shenanigans, which made her a very rich woman, are going to be a crowd-pleaser? Or is it the fact that she will be 74 when she takes to the hustings again, sliding into cough attacks, falling down stairs, failing to maintain a healthy weight level and still not telling the truth about her medical conditions going to rope them in?

Hillary indeed will be 74 if she campaigns again, and among the jurassic pickings proffered by the Democrats, that will make her the youngster of the bunch. Maybe it's that.

Does the public really want to hear her arrogant hectoring voice again, or to see her menagerie of yes-women such as Cheryl Mills or Huma Abedin cocooning around her and wielding great unaccountable power, or watch more Central Park pantsuit dances? Does the public really want more Obama Economy, single-payer health care, and leading from behind? Does the public actually want more of Chelsea Clinton and her nasty, unpleasant tweets (if not power) in front of us?

The mind boggles.

If she runs, she's quite likely to be defeated a second time, as President Trump trounces her on the strength of his economic revival. Yet the very idea of losing to President Trump as she did earlier must cheese her off daily, leaving her weeping and gnashing her teeth.

Her ego and delusions intact, she persists. I suspect President Trump will respond to such a scenario with: "Bring it on."