= new reply since forum marked as read
The issue becomes "voter familiarity with the name" where the people vote for the name because it is familiar instead of the record of achievements.
Anyone who looked at Bush Junior's achievements - multiple bankrupt companies with "investments" from rich friends of his father who were then miraculously placed in positions of power in a very corrupt Bush Senior administration, drugs, admitted ACTIVELY DRINKING alocholic with drunk driving convictions "erased" by political connections, and a lack of intellectual curiosity that was just plain embarrassing - would not have thought that nitwit was a good candidate for dog catcher, let alone President of the United States, and yet he managed to bring Cheney within arms reach of the nuclear codes, and wasn't impeached when he failed in the primary duty of the President ("protect us"
even though video has him sitting there "not being President" when told "Mr. President the country is under attack!" (Thank God we didn't have nuclear weapons raining down on us while he sat there frozen like a lump of terror - those fifteen minutes of stupid could have ended up with half the planet wiped out - sigh.)
But the name was familiar, along with "President Bush" -- and Senior was ... crafty. Former CIA Director while Kennedy was assasinated, he somehow nearly ended up President when Reagan was shot (and no one in teh halls of power thought to ask Mr. Bad-Luck to step down?), and we are a complacent country where marketing classes discuss how to get people to "buy your brand: just repeat it a bunch of times."
And yes, Hillary can do it, too, because we have had "President Clinton" already. Yes, she is accomplished, and has done a good job during her lifetime, but she is OLD ENOUGH to be a grandmother now, and really, I don't want Grandma in the White House. (Same issue with Grandpa Jeb Bush.) I want someone young enough to stay up all night reading briefings so they can ask intelligent questions, where I don't have to question if we are looking at age-related dementia issues if they forget someone's name, or whatever - and yes, I know darn good and well those things can be covered up, because Reagan.
The bigger problem is the "family friends" - the same people end up in the halls of power, and that creates cronyism and corruption influences. Do I think the Democrats are like the Republicans with this? Not as bad, but I'd prefer to have "fresh blood" with new ideas, thank you.
Let the Baby Boomers enjoy their well earned retirement (including Hillary). If she wants to keep working (and let's face it, women live longer than men, so there is that), put her on the Supreme Court. If not, let her stay one of the powerful, behind-the-scenes party leaders.
I don't want "huband and wife" or "parent-and-child" or "sibling" Presidents.
She scares them.
A) She doesn't want to be a Justice.
B) She's in her mid 60s, it's better to appoint someone a tad younger.
C) She may still want to run for president.