Few would argue at this point that Hillary Clinton seems to have reclaimed her original “presumptive Democrat nominee” status in the 2016 presidential race, despite unexpectedly fierce competition from rival Bernie Sanders.
Naturally, the next question is who Hillary will choose as her running mate. So far, her campaign hasn’t revealed much, other than what may have been a leak to The New York Times last week.
However, the candidate herself did reveal today what she claims is the top criterion for selecting her running mate. And you might be surprised to know it has nothing to do with gender, race or sexual preference.
Nope, Hillary claims she’ll be looking for someone who can do the job of president, should he or she be required to do so.
Via Washington Examiner:
Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton claims the top criterion she will use in selecting a running mate is whether the individual can take on the duties of the president in a moment’s notice.“Can this person do the job if something were to happen to the president?” she told radio host John Catsimatidis during an interview aired Sunday.
Clinton said “there are a lot of qualified men” for the vice presidential position, but she plans to “look hard” at qualified men and women as she moves closer to determining her running mate.“If I’m so fortunate as to wrap up the nomination, I’m going to really look hard at who can do the job,” she said.
One would assume part of doing the job of president would be actually answering the 3am call (like the one from Benghazi) and protecting our country’s national security, for example, though apparently Mrs. Clinton didn’t elaborate in today’s interview.
It might strike some as odd — incredible, as in unbelievable, even — that Hillary’s top criterion for choosing a running mate centers on competence, when she and her supporters are fond of suggesting her own femaleness as a central reason for electing her.
And at a time when liberals in general are making demands such as limiting appointments to non-white and transgender candidates — such as is the case, for example, of a group at Stanford University — rather than choosing the best qualified.
Indeed, Hillary’s claim belies a certain — dare we say — conservative perspective. Or at least it would if anyone believed a single word coming out of her mouth.
[Note: This article was written by Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor]