Hmm, maybe the fact that she actually has a higher education plan?
When she embraces school choice, and merit pay on steroids combined with firing incompetent teachers, at least for those trapped in down market zip codes where the educational choices are all bad, get back to me.
If the only issue that mattered out there were secondary education policy, and competence and temperament and so forth was something one felt free to ignore (it obviously isn't), I would vote for Trump in a heart beat. This is a really good example of why it is most unwise to be a one issue voter, now isn't it? 
It's not even about the specifics of the issue, though. It's literally just about the fact that she has actually spent time thinking about ways to solve problems. I mean, that's the bare minimum for being president, and Trump can't even check
that box off.
As for school choice... it continues to baffle me how this idea is thrown around as some sort of silver bullet for improving education, let alone that people seem to wilfully ignore the obvious shortcomings of the proposal. Which kids are the ones who will be most able to access different options? Likely not the Hispanic kid living in Buena Park being raised by a single mom with no car and three jobs. It's a recipe for the last hope of struggling schools to flee. That's not in the spirit of what public education is and is not going to solve anything at all. It exacerbates regional differences when we should be looking at equalizing them.
Dropping magnet programs into struggling schools is a good compromise that could actually bring rich kids in and lift the whole school up. That doesn't mean universal choice, though. It means having a few targeted programs in a school district that students can get into based on a variety of metrics. Subsidize bussing to the school. Include the local students in the program. Get the schools involved in community projects.
But letting white kids flee schools with minorities is complete bullsh-t.
