I heard a pundit on CNN again say that Clinton is the most qualified candidate in our lifetime. This line always frustrates me. Hillary is clearly very qualified, but GHW Bush served during the pundit's lifetime. You might say HRC and GHWB are equivalent, but I don't see how one makes the case that she's clearly more qualified than Bush 41: congress, ambassador to the UN, envoy to China (before diplomatic ties), head of the CIA, and VP for 8 years.
I don't think it's really possible to quantify which one is
more qualified; it's not like there's an entrance exam for the Presidency (maybe there should be!) It would be more realistic to say that they were both highly qualified, and no other recent candidate is/was at the same level.