But by the time she runs (probably 2008), assuming she is reelected, she will have been a U.S. Senator for eight years. That's two years LONGER than Dubya held public office before he became president.
Did she get to be a Senator because she was the president's wife? You betcha. On the other hand, do you think Dubya's family connections had anything to do with making him governor of Texas?
Again, I'm not saying I want her as president. But we aren't going to be able to attack her credentials, because however she got them, she's going to have them. We're going to have to attack her on the issues, and on her ethics (or lack of same).
It may have helped get his foot in the door, but it doesn't explain getting 68% of the vote in his reelection bid and wiping out Bill Clinton's personal friend Gary Mauro in the 1998 gubernatorial election in the second most populous state in the US. It was this very large margin a victory which made him a contender for the 2000 presidential race.
She will have "legislative" credentials. BUT, there is/was a thread here on FR about the actual SUCCESS RATE of Senators who had not been either a state governor or VP in runs for the presidency. I don't recall the exact statistics, but the number (if non-zero) was very small.
Being a Senator doesn't seem to equal "leadership" qualifications in the mind of the public, though it seems to with the party heirarchies.