Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Strangelet
even when compared to worse options, its important to remember just how bad the not so worse options are.
|
Yes, I do take that point - as well as Bryant's about her at least not being an idiot. Naturally it's relative. She's a peg up from some. So far she seems more accomplished. More prepared. I suppose a lot of the derision is a response to her catapulting up the news agenda despite past pronouncements that range from ignorant to downright chilling. And while part of that catapulting is the bloodsport of 'Get back in the kitchen' misogyny, there's a large part that's the result of a much more innocent 'Are we going to get our first female President?' - something that's bound to place her under greater scrutiny than the others candidates, as it did with Clinton and (as potential VP) Palin in the last election. Honestly I really wish there was a more credible female candidate. Maybe there is, and they've not reached my radar. I know I was quite scornful of Clinton 3 years ago, largely because Obama seemed at the time to be streets ahead of any President in living memory, and Clinton just seemed determined to sabotage what felt like a very precious moment with her petulence. Yes I know... it's laughable looking back. And a small part of me knew it would be. But the point is - compared to Bachmann and Palin - Clinton is a solid candidate. And as I say, all praise and criticism is relative. Even when it's about Obama. Especially when it's about Obama.
So Huntsman: what chance, do you reckon? (even without the admirable LDS instruction...)
Is it time to split the US in two?
