Matt Harwood's deeply concerned about the possibility of a dynastic presidency in the country. If Hillary wins, and then takes reelection, we'll have been under continuous rule by two families for 24 years. If Jeb then grabs the presidency, well, you get the idea. I've been hearing this a lot and I like it in theory, but I'm unconvinced on its application.
What, exactly, are the problems with dynasty? So far as I know them, they're not merely the optics of keeping it in the family. It's more that dynasties consolidate power, pass leadership onto sons, daughters, and relatives who don't deserve it, and encourage misrule through squeezing out non-related competitors. And while a perfectly good case can be made that Bush 43 wasn't ready for power, I don't think that relates to either Hillary (or for that matter, two-term governor Jeb).
Hillary, after all, is the Senator from one of the most populous and powerful states in the union, and so popular that the opposing party can't even recruit a challenger for her. She graduated #2 from Yale Law School, was a successful lawyer, and did substantive policy work within the Clinton administration, routinely earning raves for her intellectual ability, if not for her political skill. She's not, in sum, unqualified. Indeed, her name recognition helped launch her into the Senate, but it wouldn't be unexpected for a Yale Law grad turned New York Senator not named Clinton to pursue, and capture, the presidency.
