|
She's been involved in national politics for considerably longer.
Four extra years in the Senate means she was a more highly-ranking member of a number of committees, and eight years living in the White House, no matter what her role actually was, gives her pretty good insight into the responsibilities and challenges of the office of the President. Before that she was the first lady of a state for about 12 years, so she has a pretty good idea of the roles and responsibilities of the gubernatorial office as well. During all that time she has advocated for and helped write some major policy proposals, including the SCHIP (child healthcare) package that was passed under President Clinton and then failed under Bush this year.
Before politics she was also an active lawyer and involved in the business world as a legal advisor.
By contrast, Obama has been in the US Senate for three years, was a member of the Illinois state legislature for a few years before that, but has mostly been involved in community activism while serving as President of the Harvard Law Review and a professor of law at the University of Chicago. So while he has been deeply engaged in civic issues, his experience at the national level is definitely not as deep as Hillary's, and his experience with foreign policy has been largely absorbed from people like Senator Biden while he has been a junior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
So the argument comes down to what you think is more important - familiarity with the institutional responsibilities and challenges of the office of the President on Day 1, or a fresh take on the whole thing.
___________________
|