Stephanie’s point is not “opposite” to Ruth’s. Ruth’s claim is that diverse experiences should be necessary for becoming a politician. Stephanie’s point is not that diverse experiences shouldn’t be necessary; her point relates to a claim Ruth never made.

Stephanie’s response does not assume that experience is not beneficial to politics. It might be beneficial; Stephanie simply believes diverse experiences are not sufficient to be worthy of public trust.

Ruth never said that diverse experiences are sufficient to be worthy of public trust. But Stephanie appears to think this is what Ruth said, and counters this misinterpreted version of Ruth’s claim. This version is easier to criticize than what Ruth actually said.

We have no reason to think a distinction between personal and professional experience is “needed.” Both Ruth and Stephanie refer to diverse experiences. Whether such experiences need to involve personal and professional or just one of the two kinds is unknown.

Stephanie never assumes that flexibility is unimportant in politics. She simply says that diverse experiences are not sufficient to be worthy of public trust.