Who other than Hillary has the experience, the contacts, and even the conniving and conspiring credentials -- and Bill? The world's leaders are not a bunch of nice guys, ethical, honest, humanitarian. At least we can recognize those attributes in both Hillary and, before, in Bill (the perspective being their political, not his personal, standards).
Anything questionable regarding Hillary recently (such as the private emails) could be focussed on some aspect of just about anyone "up there" in politics, I imagine.
So far, I think only she has the qualifications for the position of President. Not because she's a woman. Because she's been in the world arena of negotiations and collusions and compromises and all else that we, the people, don't (and probably don't want to) know about. It takes a highly educated and trained preparation to be a brain surgeon. In a very symbolic way, that's the role of a world leader, especially the President of the U. S. When to cut, when to splice, How to prevent hemorrhage (reprisals), how to prevent paralysis (such as the Middle East situation.
In the Presidency an actor or peanut farmer or even senator is just a "front", a pubic relations position for the military industrial complex, the corporate conglomerates, the Pentagon, and mega-moneyed interests (such as Adelson, the Hunts, and even the Soros-sort.
With Hillary, of the "Clinton Dynasty" (so to speak), there's the background and experience, yes, There's the dimension of deviousness necessary to deal with deviousness and deviants running other countries, ruining other countries by terrrorism.
With Hillary/Bill "heritage" in office, of course the interests of the preponderant procedures of the country would continue (corporate, military-industrial, etc.) But there would be that dimension of "checks and balances" because of her (and his) network of influence and thus importance.
Also, just having a woman President might be good for world relations.
With no threat of a repeat of former illicit relations.