In a discussion of the candidates and our responses to them, I realised that my view of Hillary had changed over the last year or two. I had seen her as Boromir or Denethor, retaining some good characteristics, but over time mostly overthrown by ambition, until all morality was clouded or bent. Dangerous, but understandable. In the last year I think that has changed. I now see her as Smeagol, utterly overthrown by temptation (his, for small-scale dominance; hers, ambition) and dangerousness just barely fathomable.
Pitiable, yes. Were she not poised to wreak great havoc on all of us we could perhaps stand back and see her thus, a poor, wretched creature, a Gollum. Grima*, perhaps, not Shelob. We think of that only because of the gender connection, I think, which is unfair to her. She did not want absolute domination over a small place - her aim was higher. I don't rate her as Saruman - she never rose that high to fall equivalently low. The feminists who defended her as a victim of a horrible sex-offending husband may be picking up some of this pitiable quality - not acknowledging that Smeagol had choices for many centuries (and one huge choice for evil early on) until he finally had no choices at all.
Tolkien - and Lewis, Alexander, plus all the Arthurian legends, contrast how the power to destroy is common; the power to create much rarer and more difficult.
*Though I can think of a dozen Grimas around her, so that can't be it.