Since we're back to Higgins, here's something I've been thinking about. She's had to be unbiased for so long, she basically has the ability to invent herself. She has the opportunity to be the ultimate populist. Is that a good thing? Bad? She can tell us what she's for, but how will we know whether or not to believe her, or how much she'll be commitment she'll have for her causes? Without a track record, how does she show us that she really believes in what she's saying, and isn't just telling us what we want to hear? Does it even matter? She has no history of being able to make good or bad decisions, so how do we know that when issues come up, she'll be able to make the right call? It's an interesting problem, and I don't know what the solution would be.
The other question, of course, is if she'd be able to effectively do anything she'll say she'll do, if she can come up with creative ideas to get things done, and that's where her qualifications and experience (or lack thereof) comes into the discussion.
|