Regarding the b2 discussion...
Posted by
David (aka David)
Jul 28 '16, 07:46
|
I think the comparison of Bush as VP vs. Clinton as First Lady is interesting. As the driving force of her husband's political career, she was involved in more decisions than any FL ever. Similarly, since Reagan was a shadow of himself during his second term, Bush was more involved than virtually any other 20th century VP.
In other words, that's an unquestionable political positive for each one. Picking the better one is a splitting of hairs.
More than anything, what we can take from the discussion is that having spectacular qualifications for the Oval Office in no way assures that you'll perform adequately. Bush I, while not the trainwreck his son was, objectively failed as POTUS. Hillary will face obstacles from day one as a seemingly damaged candidate since if she wins, she will have beaten The Donald.
|
Responses:
|