But she did get an unusual amount of presidentially relevant experience as First Lady.
She was a senator for eight years, so it’s more like a term and a third.
I don’t think Bill’s experience is fully discountable; she had eight years of a front row seat of what life as President is like and undoubtedly some input into policy development (let’s not forget the healthcare mess that she took the lead on) and diplomacy that she later put to good use as SoS. It’s not remotely the same as being President but that’s valuable experience that very few others have.
And was followed by attorney-turned-naval-officer Richard Nixon, who likewise went from Congressman to Senator to VP before successfully running for President.
Also, consider Daniel Webster, who argued hundreds of cases before the Supreme Court: the two-term Congressman from New Hampshire spent over a dozen years in the Senate before serving for years as Secretary of State, which is at least Hillary-esque. But then the two-term Congressman from Massachusetts returned to the Senate, and in his sixth year of that got called back to play Secretary of State for years under yet another President before running for the big job with a second and separate set of Hillary-esque qualifications.
Yes, she had a front-row seat to see what the Presidency looks like, but she didn’t have any accountability or responsibility for it, and that’s what makes experience worthwhile. If it were just a matter of seeing what it looks like, then anyone could get experience just by watching a reality TV show about the President.
She was elected to the Senate twice, which may be a better indication of her abilities than her time of service. However, there are Senators who were elected to and served more terms than that who I would never want to see as President. I think it’s rare to find a candidate with a background that clearly shows the experience necessary to be President. Eisenhower was something of an exception in that regard. Even being governor of a large state has not proven out as a good indicator.
I should have know the Van Buren Boys would be getting all up in this thread. 
I hate your Rob Reiner (the actor, not me obviously). Just wanted to put that out there into cyberspace. Thanks.
So basically, we’ve had a lot of highly qualified presidents. How many of those presided over FIFTY whole states though? Jefferson and Washington only had a handful to worry about.
It’d still be kind of hilarious to see Reiner make that argument if the primary is Hillary versus Joe Biden: she’ll have the years as Obama’s Secretary of State, and he’ll have more years as Obama’s VP; she’ll have the years as a Senator, and he’ll have the decades as a Senator stretching back through to when she was still in school and hadn’t yet married the guy she’d someday play First Lady alongside.
I’d have my doubts, if Meathead weren’t the most qualified political pundit ever.
I believe Mr. Reiner was indulging the fan-boy in him by using hyperbole.
Secretary Clinton is quite qualified, but others before her were more qualified, notably Washington and Jefferson (as mentioned upthread).
That having been said, I also believe that she will win the Democratic primaries and may well win the general election.
Rob Reiner is the most credible celebrity on political affairs since Winona Ryder went klepto on Saks.
Well, like the man said LBJ presided over fifty states after serving as VP after twelve years as a Senator after roughly twelve years as a Congressman; he was followed by Nixon, who presided over fifty states after fourteen years in the House and Senate and as VP, which I think equals or surpasses Clinton’s twelve years in the Senate and as Secretary; then Ford presided over fifty states after twenty-three years in Congress and a VP stint; and Bush eventually presided over fifty states after a perfectly Clintonesque twelve years as Congressman and VP – except I’d give him the tiebreaker for time in between as UN Ambassador and Director of Central Intelligence.
And while Gore never, uh, presided, I agree that his eight years in the House and eight in the Senate and eight as VP were a better qualification than Hillary’s got.
She is going to win the nomination if she runs because she is Hillary Clinton.
She is going to win the election because she is a Democrat.
She is certainly more qualified than she was when she ran the first time around.
Big fan of George Washington but I’m surprised to see people using him as an example of a President who came to office with a good resume. Because he really didn’t. Yes, he was a great military officer. But military service doesn’t always translate well into the Presidency (Grant was the unfortunate proof of that). And outside of his military record, Washington wasn’t all that distinguished on paper. He hadn’t served as a governor or ambassador or member of Congress. He was a delegate at the Continental Congresses but these really only met for a couple of months and Washington’s presence at them wasn’t all that outstanding. He was a notable success in business but that’s mitigated by the fact that he had family money to start with.
Rob Reiner the actor barely exists these days.
What are your feelings wrt Rob Reiner the director?
I’d counter:
-
He was widely considered to be the person most responsible for winning the American Revolutionary War, and thus was seen as the greatest hero in the country in his time–and many would say of all time. He was like a combination of the biggest celebrity alive in America today wrapped in the political mystique of post-Assassination JFK but he enjoyed that while still alive. All factions supported him politically even those that didn’t fully agree with his politics. His political support and mass appeal are essentially unprecedented–maybe Roosevelt is the closest we’ve come since then. He easily had the fame/popularity to go the route of Bolivar.
-
He was actually the President of the Constitutional Convention, and while none of his words are recorded it is believed he played a key role in guiding the deliberations. Not as an ideas man, but in terms of keeping discussions going and keeping order.
-
His business success was a bit more impressive than you give him credit for, his inherited family wealth wasn’t all that great. His wealth derived from his marriage to Martha was far greater, and he was an extremely creative businessman. While many of his slaveholding peers who were members of the great “First Families of Virginia” slowly ran themselves into financial ruin due to poor farming practices and hefty mortgages on their land he was diversified into several different businesses and by some measure has been considered the wealthiest President we’ve had yet, adjusting for inflation. He was a business tycoon in a field that bankrupted most families who did it for a couple generations.
Well in matter of politics they seem, from distant eyes, to be the same condescending ars*hole as each other.
Guess the Spinal Tap movie was alright, and The Bucket List was ok.
Dragging this back on-topic, how about Hubert H. Humphrey? He won a couple of mayoral elections before serving in the Senate for considerably longer than Hillary Clinton did – even without counting his years as Majority Whip – before putting in the years as Johnson’s VP before running for President in '68.