She has also been married for more than three years. Whose to say that she hasn't been trying for a while and she had trouble. Good luck to her and her husband. I hope everything works out.

Anonymous wrote:What makes her qualified for Congress? Degrees?

Have you looked at the people in Congress? Paul Ryan's experience running something is exactly zero. Aside from waiting tables and working as a fitness trainer, all of his jobs were in politics. And he's your budget architect and VP candidate.

What makes her qualified for Congress? Degrees?

Not PP, but I see that she has been on the advisory board of a number of organizations of the arts and in non-profit humanitarian work (at agencies that are not her parents' foundation as well as the Clinton foundation). She's extremely involved in her parents' humanitarian foundation. She's worked in consulting/business (for McKinsey), and worked in the press (for NBC). She has a background in public health (an MPH). She was heavily involved in her mothers' political campaigns. Both she and her husband come from political families, and her husband works in the financial sector, so she gets plenty of exposure to that.

While most of these experiences would probably not have happened without her family connections, she hasn't been lazy about grabbing opportunity to get involved in leadership roles and has experience to a lot of areas that are relevant to a political career. She's clearly a bright woman who has a lot of exposure to various facets of society. There are certainly less qualified people who run for congress.

What makes her qualified for Congress? Degrees?

Anonymous wrote:

I dunno. She's reasonably well qualified to run for Congress. She has two masters degrees, a PhD in progress, and serves on multiple boards. She's had more opportunities that one would expect because of her last name, but she's done a lot of stuff.

She does have contacts and opportunities that others do not have. However, two masters and working on a PhD are not experience at "running" things. Look what we have now.

Please read more carefully.

I dunno. She's reasonably well qualified to run for Congress. She has two masters degrees, a PhD in progress, and serves on multiple boards. She's had more opportunities that one would expect because of her last name, but she's done a lot of stuff.

She does have contacts and opportunities that others do not have. However, two masters and working on a PhD are not experience at "running" things. Look what we have now.

Anonymous wrote:Chelsea Clinton is a vivacious and smart woman who has previously made public comments about her desire to have a child and be a mother (and about her love for her own mother). Don't beat her up. She is smart, lovely, and thoroughly normal.

+1

Anonymous wrote:I think being a grandma definitely ages Hillary. Absurd, but still.

This would never be said about a man. Ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Doubt it's a stunt, though I can't believe that she could talk with any hint of serious credibility about running for mayor of NY or Senate, as she did.

She has just about zero significant accomplishments in anything that would remotely qualify her for a significant public position. Yet there's that familial sense of entitlement that will keep me (a Dem-now-independent and strongly anti-Republican) from voting for her mother.

She's the former senator from New York and the former Secretary of State.

She is now more qualified than George W. Bush or Barack Obama when they were elected.

What the fuck do you want in a candidate?

I think PP was talking about Chelsea's possible political aspirations (she has hinted at this recently).

I dunno. She's reasonably well qualified to run for Congress. She has two masters degrees, a PhD in progress, and serves on multiple boards. She's had more opportunities that one would expect because of her last name, but she's done a lot of stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chelsea_Clinton

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nicole Wallace, a committed GOP operative, on Morning Joe called the notion that the pregnancy is politically motivated the dumbest thing she had heard.

I expect she heard something dumber within minutes if Joe was there.

Actually, Andrew Sorkin was the one who said some dumb things.

Anonymous wrote:Not everything is “choreographed” for political gain - even in the world of the Clintons. Chelsea and her husband were ready to start a family. That’s it. It shouldn’t have an impact on a possible campaign of Hillary’s - it is part of life for goodness sakes. If Chelsea’s pregnancy plays a role in any campaign, then the people of this nation have sunk pretty low - there are many more important things to consider.

It's naive to think that the Clintons and their daughter didn't discuss the timing before Chelsea went ahead with it. They're political animals.

Anonymous wrote:Nicole Wallace, a committed GOP operative, on Morning Joe called the notion that the pregnancy is politically motivated the dumbest thing she had heard.

I expect she heard something dumber within minutes if Joe was there.

Nicole Wallace, a committed GOP operative, on Morning Joe called the notion that the pregnancy is politically motivated the dumbest thing she had heard.

Happy for her and the Clinton's. Babies are welcomed!!

Chelsea Clinton is a vivacious and smart woman who has previously made public comments about her desire to have a child and be a mother (and about her love for her own mother). Don't beat her up. She is smart, lovely, and thoroughly normal.