I remember watching a disucssion on CNN, and a former winner or something said that the girls are judged for their very neutral, general, and universally accepted statements. Somebody also said that the question itself was unfair, because its polarizing, in comparisson to a question like "Do you want world peace" "Would you solve world hunger?", etc.
But still, I think that the most objective way to judge a girl is by how neutral she was. What if she did win? Then conservatives will argue that there's a liberal bias in the competition. What if a girl said she didn't want gays to get married and she lost? I'm a supporter of gay marriage, but nobody should be pushed down due to their beliefs.
I believe that judging a girl based on how neutral and charismatic her statement was, is as close to objective as you can get in such a subjective competition.
