I was watching CNN yesterday and I was a litle bit puzzled by what I heard about the Caroline Kennedy campaign of interest for Clinton's NY Senate post.
Basically, the argument was is she qualified or not?
Now pretty much all who had anything to say on the matter stated their position following a pattern: She has no experience, but she can sure raise a lot of money for a campaign, but she has no experience, but she can raise money...
This follows the Primaries and the Presidential election, where raising money was a huge factor, and where the least experienced candidate won both the fundraising race and the election race.
So is that what it takes to become a US politician? The ability to raise money to campaign?
Well name recognition and ability to fundraise are certainly big assets when a candidate has to be able to largely fund their own re-election campaigns.
They're not the only thing but yeah, experience, qualifications, all that good stuff, seem to take a bit of a back seat to the ability to win elections.
In this case though there's also a bit of a family dynasty thing going on - despite being supposedly a meritocracy, they are fond of creating political dynasties, and the Kennedys is one of the biggest.