George Washington was inescapably historical as our first president. Abraham Lincoln won the Civil War. Now, the qualifications seem to have shifted a bit.
Political History 2012:
The first black president of the United States, an unfrocked lawyer whose birth data and educational details escaped public verification and whose signature “Affordable Care Act” promised cheaper, better healthcare plus the right to keep our doctors but delivered none of those.
Political History 2016:
The same people have nominated the first female United States presidential candidate, a lawyer fired from the Watergate Investigation for dishonesty and a subject of various scandals and investigations since.
Both of these historically significant individuals share a list of personal accomplishments as unimpressive as their lists of qualifications when attainment of political office is ignored. Ignoring that seems appropriate as it appears to have been conferred by others in both instances. It should be noted that both these historical folk have become very wealthy while drawing their modest government salaries. However, that seems unworthy of notice in the history of politicians…. It is after all, routine.
Political History 2020:
As it seems likely that the incumbent, whoever he/she is, will be the next Herbert Hoover for financial reasons, the presumed weakness will perhaps be exploited by the presentation of an LGBT candidate by the same folk who have given us black and female. How being biologically LGBT relates to excellence in presidential performance is an open question, but then no more so than it was when it was black or female. While American presidential elections have always tended to resemble a circus, they seem now, with the hearty support of U.S. public education, to have proceeded into farce.
Plus ca change …