When delegates officially nominated Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential candidacy last night, commentators couldn’t get enough of the word “historic.”

Yesterday marks the first time a woman has ever been selected as a major American political party’s nominee, but journalist Sarah Rumpf of The Capitolist took to Twitter to explain why she believes the accomplishment isn’t so great.

She added, “Try to argue with a straight face that Hillary would be the Democratic nominee, or Secretary of State or a Senator, if she weren’t *Mrs.* Clinton.”

Rumpf then laid out the argument for why Clinton’s elite status has resulted in her various positions in the government.

Is Rumpf right? Did First Lady name recognition have anything to do with Clinton’s years of success? This Twitter user seems to think so.